274 réponses à ce sujet

[digby69]

Basically you have a conflict btween ME2 & 3.

In 2 EDI states that dreadnoughts can't take down Capital Reaper ships.

In 3 the codex states that 3-4 dreadnoughts can take down a Capital Reaper.

Since we're playing ME3 the second statement wins.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

o Ventus wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

TookYoCookies wrote...

Rasputin we get it, you would lose conventionally.

While many others would win conventionally.

Uhm no. Beating the Reapers conventionally isn't possible. 

Have you attempted it yet?

Yup, in the refusal ending. I failed miserably, and everyone died because of me.

[ghost9191]

3 dreadnaughts can take out a reaper capital ship,. and thanix cannons do take down shields. and a decent amount of ships have thanix cannons installed

not saying conventional victory could be possible. maybe a war of attrition or something , but considering the reapers make troops out of civilians and such , and they can replace their ground troops easily enough idk. although they cannot replaces their ships fast. but they have alot of them so , again attrition might work. gurrila attacks , hit and run and such but we wouldn't be able to hold onto planets.

just be able to continue fighting till the very last person, doing as much dmg as possible. but the reapers numbers are too great, unless we find a weakness that can be exploited they will win because of numbers alone

Modifié par ghost9191, 12 juillet 2012 - 09:34 .

[o Ventus]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

TookYoCookies wrote...

Rasputin we get it, you would lose conventionally.

While many others would win conventionally.

Uhm no. Beating the Reapers conventionally isn't possible. 

Have you attempted it yet?

Yup, in the refusal ending. I failed miserably, and everyone died because of me.

And how many times are you able to repeat this experiment?

[Tealjaker94]

Here, hypothesis time! The codex says there are 20000 reapers. I'd estimate about 1000-5000 are capital ships. Let's stay conservative. We have ~125 dreadnoughts. Let's assume all have Thanix weaponry which will allow them to match a reaper. I'll go ahead and say our dreadnoughts are lucky and take out 200 capital ships. That still leaves us with 800 capital ships and 19000 destroyers and only cruisers and lighter ships to fight them.

[Naerivar]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

TookYoCookies wrote...

Rasputin we get it, you would lose conventionally.

While many others would win conventionally.

Uhm no. Beating the Reapers conventionally isn't possible. 

Have you attempted it yet?

Yup, in the refusal ending. I failed miserably, and everyone died because of me.

No, everybody died because of the Reapers and Starbrat. Besides, not everyone died because there was a new cycle.

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Here, hypothesis time! The codex says
there are 20000 reapers. I'd estimate about 1000-5000 are capital
ships. Let's stay conservative. We have ~125 dreadnoughts. Let's assume
all have Thanix weaponry which will allow them to match a reaper. I'll
go ahead and say our dreadnoughts are lucky and take out 200 capital
ships. That still leaves us with 800 capital ships and 19000 destroyers
and only cruisers and lighter ships to fight them.

By your reasoning America would have won the Vietnam war also
If you see conventional warfare as just pitting one ship versus another. Then yes, you'll lose badly.

Modifié par Naerivar, 12 juillet 2012 - 09:34 .

[o Ventus]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Here, hypothesis time! The codex says there are 20000 reapers. I'd estimate about 1000-5000 are capital ships. Let's stay conservative. We have ~125 dreadnoughts. Let's assume all have Thanix weaponry which will allow them to match a reaper. I'll go ahead and say our dreadnoughts are lucky and take out 200 capital ships. That still leaves us with 800 capital ships and 19000 destroyers and only cruisers and lighter ships to fight them.

Cruisers can match a destroyer...

[TookYoCookies]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

TookYoCookies wrote...

Rasputin we get it, you would lose conventionally.

While many others would win conventionally.

Uhm no. Beating the Reapers conventionally isn't possible. 

For you.

[Applepie_Svk]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Here, hypothesis time! The codex says there are 20000 reapers. I'd estimate about 1000-5000 are capital ships. Let's stay conservative. We have ~125 dreadnoughts. Let's assume all have Thanix weaponry which will allow them to match a reaper. I'll go ahead and say our dreadnoughts are lucky and take out 200 capital ships. That still leaves us with 800 capital ships and 19000 destroyers and only cruisers and lighter ships to fight them.

You are wrong there is around 20 000 capital ships - only one can be crafted by cycle, lesser species are used to craft of other ships.
Otherwise Reaper tactics showing that they are affraid of direct combat and even in final battle over Earth you have only few hundreed ships deffending most important key in their society, which is disproving their fleet superiority. 

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 12 juillet 2012 - 09:39 .

[NoUserNameHere]

Let's look at it this way:

If Reaper dreadnoughts are 100% impervious to conventional weaponry, then Mass Effect 2 should have been about R&D into weaponry that could destroy them. Would provide better buildup than our 3rd-act Crucible, that's for sure.

[TookYoCookies]

o Ventus wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

TookYoCookies wrote...

Rasputin we get it, you would lose conventionally.

While many others would win conventionally.

Uhm no. Beating the Reapers conventionally isn't possible. 

Have you attempted it yet?

No. Prevented by bad game design.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

Naerivar wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

TookYoCookies wrote...

Rasputin we get it, you would lose conventionally.

While many others would win conventionally.

Uhm no. Beating the Reapers conventionally isn't possible. 

Have you attempted it yet?

Yup, in the refusal ending. I failed miserably, and everyone died because of me.

No, everybody died because of the Reapers and Starbrat. Besides, not everyone died because there was a new cycle.

All advanced species died. The other ones were left alone like in every other cycle of cpurse.

[D24O]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Here, hypothesis time! The codex says there are 20000 reapers. I'd estimate about 1000-5000 are capital ships. Let's stay conservative. We have ~125 dreadnoughts. Let's assume all have Thanix weaponry which will allow them to match a reaper. I'll go ahead and say our dreadnoughts are lucky and take out 200 capital ships. That still leaves us with 800 capital ships and 19000 destroyers and only cruisers and lighter ships to fight them.

I'd wager we could take out at least another hundred capital ships, and many more destroyers. Thanix weapons are on all types of ships, and we also have ground cannons, WMD's Javelin missiles and Dark energy weapons. We're far from rolling over and dying.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

TookYoCookies wrote...

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

TookYoCookies wrote...

Rasputin we get it, you would lose conventionally.

While many others would win conventionally.

Uhm no. Beating the Reapers conventionally isn't possible. 

For you.

No, for everyone. In the refusal ending, the reapers continue the cycle. What happens in the game is how it is. No amouny of speculation will change that.

[Tritium315]

That's why we needed to invest all our collective energy into building those super guns that took out the Reaper in that mission; not into making a giant battery.

[D24O]

NoUserNameHere wrote...

Let's look at it this way:

If Reaper dreadnoughts are 100% impervious to conventional weaponry, then Mass Effect 2 should have been about R&D into weaponry that could destroy them. Would provide better buildup than our 3rd-act Crucible, that's for sure.

3 just ended up s***ing on 2's relevance to the story. Such a shame.

[Tealjaker94]

D24O wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Here, hypothesis time! The codex says there are 20000 reapers. I'd estimate about 1000-5000 are capital ships. Let's stay conservative. We have ~125 dreadnoughts. Let's assume all have Thanix weaponry which will allow them to match a reaper. I'll go ahead and say our dreadnoughts are lucky and take out 200 capital ships. That still leaves us with 800 capital ships and 19000 destroyers and only cruisers and lighter ships to fight them.

I'd wager we could take out at least another hundred capital ships, and many more destroyers. Thanix weapons are on all types of ships, and we also have ground cannons, WMD's Javelin missiles and Dark energy weapons. We're far from rolling over and dying.

Oh I think we could potentialy kill 500 capital ships and maybe 3000-5000 destroyers. I was just showing how even in the best circumstances our strongest ships couldn't win us the war.

[D24O]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

D24O wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Here, hypothesis time! The codex says there are 20000 reapers. I'd estimate about 1000-5000 are capital ships. Let's stay conservative. We have ~125 dreadnoughts. Let's assume all have Thanix weaponry which will allow them to match a reaper. I'll go ahead and say our dreadnoughts are lucky and take out 200 capital ships. That still leaves us with 800 capital ships and 19000 destroyers and only cruisers and lighter ships to fight them.

I'd wager we could take out at least another hundred capital ships, and many more destroyers. Thanix weapons are on all types of ships, and we also have ground cannons, WMD's Javelin missiles and Dark energy weapons. We're far from rolling over and dying.

Oh I think we could potentialy kill 500 capital ships and maybe 3000-5000 destroyers. I was just showing how even in the best circumstances our strongest ships couldn't win us the war.

Yeah. But give our weapons to the next races and give them even a few hundred years head start, and they'll have a good chance to go toe to toe with the Reapers.

[spiriticon]

D24O wrote...

NoUserNameHere wrote...

Let's look at it this way:

If Reaper dreadnoughts are 100% impervious to conventional weaponry, then Mass Effect 2 should have been about R&D into weaponry that could destroy them. Would provide better buildup than our 3rd-act Crucible, that's for sure.

3 just ended up s***ing on 2's relevance to the story. Such a shame.

I think most Alliance ships were already fitted with Thanix Cannons, which could hurt the Reapers far more than any weapon done before. In terms of updating weaponry R&D, I think the forces were already maxed out.

[Hanabii]

digby69 wrote...

Basically you have a conflict btween ME2 & 3.

In 2 EDI states that dreadnoughts can't take down Capital Reaper ships.

In 3 the codex states that 3-4 dreadnoughts can take down a Capital Reaper.

Since we're playing ME3 the second statement wins.

Let me say this.

3-4 Dreadnaughts isn't the same as a dreadnaught vs a reaper, it's 4 vs 1 and the reaper still takes out some with it.
You also must take into account technological advancement. Firing strategies.

When fighting each other Dreadnaughts are NEVER allowed to fire in the direction of a planet, not so on the battle against the reapers. There were also a hell of a lot more dreadnaughts and dreadnaught class weapons in the opening part.

Conventional victory is impossible, but the vast amount of fleets allowed for basically a quick stab with the proverbial spear to inject shepard, the catalyst and the tool they were gambling everything upon to activate and keep it safe.

If you have low EMS the Crucible gets damaged, your forces get decimated and you barely make it and burn your own world.

High EMS means they held them at bay long enough to do what needed to be done as intended. The reason you can't win conventionally isn't forces alone, but strategy. The crucible IS the strategy and EVERYTHING is invested in it. If conventional victory was the stratagy there would be no Shield Fleet, there would be a different Ratio, ship formation drive, there would be a different overall approach to the battle. Less head to head and more hit and run?

[Funkdrspot]

Naerivar wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Here, hypothesis time! The codex says
there are 20000 reapers. I'd estimate about 1000-5000 are capital
ships. Let's stay conservative. We have ~125 dreadnoughts. Let's assume
all have Thanix weaponry which will allow them to match a reaper. I'll
go ahead and say our dreadnoughts are lucky and take out 200 capital
ships. That still leaves us with 800 capital ships and 19000 destroyers
and only cruisers and lighter ships to fight them.

By your reasoning America would have won the Vietnam war also
If you see conventional warfare as just pitting one ship versus another. Then yes, you'll lose badly.

Non sequitur. how in the world does that make sense to you? You just just handwaved like a dozen important variables, just so you could boil it down to a fallacy? 

[Tritium315]

spiriticon wrote...

D24O wrote...

NoUserNameHere wrote...

Let's look at it this way:

If Reaper dreadnoughts are 100% impervious to conventional weaponry, then Mass Effect 2 should have been about R&D into weaponry that could destroy them. Would provide better buildup than our 3rd-act Crucible, that's for sure.

3 just ended up s***ing on 2's relevance to the story. Such a shame.

I think most Alliance ships were already fitted with Thanix Cannons, which could hurt the Reapers far more than any weapon done before. In terms of updating weaponry R&D, I think the forces were already maxed out.

Except for the big ass gun that Cerberus found that one shots Reapers and leaves ****ing canyons on planets that you can see from space.

Modifié par Tritium315, 12 juillet 2012 - 10:02 .

[spiriticon]

Tritium315 wrote...

spiriticon wrote...

D24O wrote...

NoUserNameHere wrote...

Let's look at it this way:

If Reaper dreadnoughts are 100% impervious to conventional weaponry, then Mass Effect 2 should have been about R&D into weaponry that could destroy them. Would provide better buildup than our 3rd-act Crucible, that's for sure.

3 just ended up s***ing on 2's relevance to the story. Such a shame.

I think most Alliance ships were already fitted with Thanix Cannons, which could hurt the Reapers far more than any weapon done before. In terms of updating weaponry R&D, I think the forces were already maxed out.

Except for the big ass gun that Cerberus found that one shots Reapers and leaves ****ing canyons on planets that you can see from space.

There's a big ass gun that one shots the Reapers and leaves canyons?? Can you even put that on a ship? Whay doesn't the Normandy have it?

The only thing I can remember that can one hit kill a Reaper is Kalros, the hugest mofo thresher maw one has ever seen.

[Tritium315]

spiriticon wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

spiriticon wrote...

D24O wrote...

NoUserNameHere wrote...

Let's look at it this way:

If Reaper dreadnoughts are 100% impervious to conventional weaponry, then Mass Effect 2 should have been about R&D into weaponry that could destroy them. Would provide better buildup than our 3rd-act Crucible, that's for sure.

3 just ended up s***ing on 2's relevance to the story. Such a shame.

I think most Alliance ships were already fitted with Thanix Cannons, which could hurt the Reapers far more than any weapon done before. In terms of updating weaponry R&D, I think the forces were already maxed out.

Except for the big ass gun that Cerberus found that one shots Reapers and leaves ****ing canyons on planets that you can see from space.

There's a big ass gun that one shots the Reapers and leaves canyons?? Can you even put that on a ship? Whay doesn't the Normandy have it?

The only thing I can remember that can one hit kill a Reaper is Kalros, the hugest mofo thresher maw one has ever seen.

The gun that smoked the derelict Reaper where you get the IFF in ME2. TIM told us his team found both the target (the Reaper) and the weapon when they were investigating the rift.